Medvedev Labels Djokovic’s PTPA Exit ‘Bad Look,’ Renews Call for Earlier Australian Open Night Sessions

In a world where tennis players are increasingly vocal about the sport’s governance and scheduling, Daniil Medvedev has emerged as a prominent voice, offering candid opinions on everything from player unions to match timings. The former world number one recently weighed in on Novak Djokovic’s high-profile decision to sever ties with the Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA), an organization Djokovic himself co-founded. Medvedev didn’t mince words, labeling the move a ‘bad look’ for the nascent union, a sentiment that reverberates through the professional tennis community.

Djokovic, a towering figure in tennis, announced his complete withdrawal from the PTPA on X, citing “ongoing concerns regarding transparency, governance, and the way my voice and image have been represented.” He expressed pride in the initial vision he shared with co-founder Vasek Pospisil to give players an independent voice but admitted his values no longer aligned with the organization’s current trajectory. This departure, from one of the PTPA’s chief architects, inevitably casts a shadow over its future and operational effectiveness.

Medvedev’s Candid Take on Djokovic’s PTPA Exit

Speaking at the Brisbane International after an opening victory, Medvedev was direct yet cautious in his assessment. “I saw it. For sure, it’s kind of a bad look on PTPA, because he was a co-founder,” Medvedev remarked, acknowledging the gravity of Djokovic’s exit. He admitted to not knowing the precise factors behind Djokovic’s decision, making it “tough for me to say” more definitively. Yet, his initial reaction underscores the perception hit the PTPA has taken.

Medvedev, while never a decision-maker within the PTPA, has consistently voiced support for its underlying principle. “I was always for PTPA, because I do think ATP can improve some things, and they are the monopoly in the sport,” he explained, touching upon a widely held belief among players that a separate, independent body could foster greater accountability and fairer representation. This perspective highlights the ongoing tension between the established ATP tour and the breakaway PTPA, both vying for influence in shaping the sport’s future.

Despite his supportive stance, Medvedev maintains a pragmatic approach. “I know my priorities,” he stated, emphasizing his focus on his own career. He views the PTPA’s existence as a positive, even if it merely serves to prompt the ATP to scrutinize potential areas for improvement. “I’m not for it, not against it. I think guys should continue doing their job and try to do it as good as they can,” he concluded, signaling a wait-and-see attitude while wishing the organization well.

Djokovic, in his initial statement to The Guardian in 2021, articulated the PTPA’s core ambition: “We want to be accepted, respected and acknowledged. That’s what we want. That’s what we deserve as players.” His departure, however, leaves a void and raises questions about how the PTPA will navigate its path forward without its most prominent advocate. Djokovic affirmed his intention to now focus on his tennis, family, and contributing to the sport in ways that align with his personal principles, effectively closing this chapter of his involvement.

Addressing the ‘Racquet Rampage’ and On-Court Emotions

Beyond the politics of player unions, Medvedev also recently reflected on his own past on-court theatrics, particularly a memorable “racquet rampage” during last year’s Australian Open. The incident, which saw him furiously smash his racquet, damaging a net camera and incurring substantial fines, became a talking point, even ironically featured in Tennis Australia’s promotional video for the upcoming 2026 tournament.

Medvedev, ever the character, found humor in the situation. “Damn, they should reduce the fine then because promotion means money. I didn’t get paid for this,” he quipped, a smirk undoubtedly playing on his lips. He acknowledged the severity of his actions, realizing he had damaged a more expensive camera than he initially thought. “I should not do it, but emotions are emotions, and sometimes if you make bad emotions, you pay for it. You pay fines, you pay for the camera,” he stated, accepting responsibility without a hint of appeal.

This candid reflection reveals a more mature Medvedev, one who understands the consequences of his fiery temperament. While he can’t change the past, he vows to learn from it: “I was always someone who was capable to say, ‘Yeah, that was not right,’ but at the same time, we cannot change the past. That happened, I paid for it, and I’m OK to pay for it… but I should not do it again – that is the only thing.” This commitment to self-improvement, both in temperament and performance, is a hallmark of top athletes striving for sustained excellence.

Last season, Medvedev experienced a dip in his ranking, falling from the top five to as low as 18th before a late-year resurgence. His three Australian Open finals between 2021 and 2024 highlight his prowess on hard courts, yet he modestly downplays his favorite status for 2026. “At this moment of my career, I am a little bit not any more the favourite guy to win everything – but I will try to as fast as possible again be this guy,” he asserted, signaling his ambition to reclaim his dominant form.

Medvedev’s Persistent Call for Earlier Australian Open Night Sessions

Another recurring theme in Medvedev’s recent commentary has been his persistent call for earlier night sessions at the Australian Open. The Russian has endured multiple post-midnight finishes at Melbourne Park, including a match against Learner Tien that ended at 2:55 am in 2025 and another against Emil Ruusuvuori in 2024 that stretched until 3:39 am. These grueling schedules, he argues, are unfair to players, spectators, and officials alike, benefiting nobody.

“It never will, because TV’s controlling everything and I think there is always a reason why it [starts at] 7:00 pm and not 6:00 pm,” Medvedev conceded, recognizing the formidable influence of television broadcasters. Despite his resignation to the commercial realities, he continues to advocate for change. The Australian Open’s notorious reputation for late finishes, with two matches scheduled for its evening sessions starting at 7:00 pm on the main courts, has been a source of contention for years. Andy Murray’s five-hour, 45-minute epic against Thanasi Kokkinakis in 2023, which concluded at 4:05 am, further amplified calls for reform.

Medvedev believes a simple adjustment could make a significant difference. “It made sense to start at 6:00 pm to try to finish earlier,” he suggested. He drew an analogy to football, noting that he doesn’t watch the Premier League in Australia because matches are often at 2:00 am. “It’s pretty much the same – people who really love tennis would like to see it at six because then they are almost sure to watch both matches,” he explained. “OK, if it goes ridiculously long, [instead of finishing] at three, it would finish at two. It’s better for everyone.” His argument resonates with many fans who struggle to follow matches that extend into the early hours, impacting viewership and the overall fan experience, as reported by AFP.

Medvedev’s willingness to speak out on these issues, coupled with his self-awareness regarding his on-court behavior, paints a picture of a complex and evolving athlete. He navigates the demanding world of professional tennis with a blend of competitive fire and a growing sense of responsibility, both to his own game and to the broader ecosystem of the sport.

Daniil Medvedev stands as a compelling figure in modern tennis, not just for his formidable skills but for his unvarnished honesty. His commentary on Djokovic’s PTPA exit highlights the delicate balance of power and player representation in the sport, while his personal reflections on past meltdowns demonstrate a valuable capacity for growth. Moreover, his persistent advocacy for practical changes like earlier night sessions at Grand Slams underscores a thoughtful engagement with the sport’s operational challenges, cementing his role as a voice that demands attention, even when he feels changes are unlikely.